this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
167 points (97.2% liked)

Canada

8156 readers
2129 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mars 16 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Don't get me wrong, this is a win and worthy of setting a legal precedent, however I am skeptical of the first line in the article:

Earlier this year in Halifax, a former sex worker won a precedent-setting case.

If this was Small Claims court, are there examples of rulings from this court actually setting precedent for other courts (e.g. Lower or Superior courts)?

[–] Rumblestiltskin 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I guess the significant thing is that the judge ruled this way based on current laws and past legal precedent which should hopefully be consistent in future cases.

[–] mars 7 points 2 years ago

...which should hopefully be consistent in future cases.

This was my main concern. Legal rulings are built on those that came before, however they can also be reversed by higher courts.

I found this complementary CBC article on this that provides a little bit of clarity:

But part of the immediate significance of the judgment, advocates say, is that it happened in a court that's relatively accessible; the law has been clarified that at the small-claims level, a contract for sexual services is enforceable.

That means that a sex worker who hasn't been paid by a client can now pursue that in small claims court without having to argue the law, so long as they have the supporting facts.

"Now they can bring this judgment and put it on the judges desk and say, 'here it is, there's precedent for it; I want my judgment,'" said Rose.

Note that this is a quote by the plaintiff's lawyer (Jessica Rose). I'm obviously no lawyer myself but I would read this as precedent-setting for the Small Claims Court of Nova Scotia, with the caveat that other provinces' small claims courts and all higher courts are still lacking their own ruling here. Ultimately the law itself needs to be tested in higher courts, which is also referenced in the article:

In 2021, the alliance sued the federal and Ontario provincial governments, arguing that the conditions of criminalization allow exploitation to flourish. That case had its first hearing in October 2022, and is awaiting a judgment. If successful, it could result in the law being struck down, paving the path to full decriminalization of sex work.

[–] ramjambamalam 3 points 2 years ago

It's lower level precedence, but it's still precedence. Another court at the same level would be inclined to follow this precedence.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

It's about time!

[–] ImplyingImplications 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

The world's oldest profession

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] ImplyingImplications 15 points 2 years ago

Hunt and gather dez nuts

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

The world's oldest exploitation... 😞